Re: skills for mechanical watches
- From: "Alex W." <ingilt@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2007 11:31:17 +0100
"SWG" <swisswatchguy@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
On Sep 6, 1:19 am, "Alex W." <ing...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Jack Denver" <nunuv...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
This is a strange standard. We usually buy goods for our own lifetime,
not that of our descendants. We do not hesitate to buy VCRs, tape
etc. even though we know they will be obsolete even in our own
Because of the discount factor of "present value" , the utility of an
in the future is worth much less than the utility it brings today. For
example, suppose I have a choice between 2 refrigerators - one will
10 years and the other 20. It does not make sense to pay twice as much
for the latter because the utility it will bring in years 1 to 10 is
much more than the utility in years 11 to 20. I'm sure you great
grandchildren would rather you deposit $600 for them in an interest
bearing account rather than leave them a $600 watch. Due to the magic
compound interest, that $600 would be many thousands in 100 years.
Minus the evil magic of inflation and rise in cost of living ....
Watches are not consumer goods like VCRs or washing machines. They are
objects of desire, and different standards apply, the same standards, in
fact, as the woman who buys jewellery expecting to bequeath it to her
daughter some day.
I would also posit that buying for our own lifetime and built-in
obsolescence are a comparatively recent phenomenon. Not so long ago,
were built to last for centuries, and goods were often acquired in the
expectation that they would last for generations -- firearms spring to
as does good flatware, porcelain, even some clothing. I still remember
grandparents grumbling when they had to replace their refrigerator a bare
fifty years after buying it.
BTW, if I were picking a watch to put in a time capsule, I'd chose
something like a Casio digital solar quartz (with the battery removed).
Unless you did a really good job waterproofing your time capsule, in
years a mechanical may be a rusty mess. Recently they opened a buried
time capsule in which they had "sealed" a brand new Plymouth in 1957.
capsule had leaked and it was a worthless rust bucket.
Water-proofing alone won't be enough. The ambient moisture would be
sufficient to rust fragile circuits, and far more so than a comparatively
robust mechanical movement.
Mechanical watches in the electronic age cannot be explained rationally
any more than mechanical adding machines in the age of digital
calculators. The latter died because they were purely practical devices
while watches have high "emotional" content.
Rationality is the least of our concerns when making any purchase other
pure commodities. How many shirts do we actually *need*, and is there a
rational requirement that they have a specific cut or colour? On the
of rationality, we'd all buy the cheapest and most efficient car because
have no need to be able to accelerate to 60MPH in X seconds in something
with leather seats and 17 coats of bright colours.
One can't live by bare necessities: Emotions lead the world!
Emotions rule capitalism. It only works on fear and greed, confidence and
expectation, snobbery and aspiration. The very concept of money is a
- Re: skills for mechanical watches
- From: Frank Adam
- Re: skills for mechanical watches
- Prev by Date: Re: 8 most complex watches
- Next by Date: Re: skills for mechanical watches
- Previous by thread: Re: skills for mechanical watches
- Next by thread: Re: skills for mechanical watches